Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473476 Conrad Meyer <konrad@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Conrad Meyer <konrad@xxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-16 07:20:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > My comments to the BADs and ???s are prefixed with "DH:" > > - [ BAD ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should > be posted in the review. > trytond.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /etc/trytond.conf tryton > trytond.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /etc/trytond.conf tryton > trytond.noarch: E: non-readable /etc/trytond.conf 0640 > > DH: trytond.conf contains login information for the DB server including a > password, so the file shouldn't be world-readable > > trytond.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/trytond tryton > trytond.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/trytond tryton > trytond.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/trytond 0750 > trytond.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/trytond tryton > trytond.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/trytond tryton > trytond.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/log/trytond 0750 > > I think the above are ignorable. > > DH: yes, these are normal when using an own user > > trytond.noarch: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/trytond > > DH: it is OK, because the deamon includes its own log rotation mechanism > > trytond.noarch: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/trytond ${prog} > > DH: it is OK, because the default Fedora initscript template is used and the > subsys is set via the $prog variable OK. > - [ BAD ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming > Guidelines. > I think the name should have a python- prefix. See: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages_.28python_modules.29 > > DH: I must disagree, trytond is a standalone application, it only uses python > module in its implementation and the module cannot be used by external > applications I agree that it as a standalone application -- maybe the python module can be installed in a subpackage python-%{name}? If you are absolutely sure it cannot be used by external applications I am ok with the current name. > - [ ??? ] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If > it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a > package which does create that directory. Refer to the Guidelines for > examples. > > I think you should Requires: chkconfig which owns /etc/init.d. (But I > guess this package isn't really removable on Fedora anyways so I'm > not considering this a blocker. > > DH: /etc/rc.d/init.d (what is the primary location) is owned by "initscripts" > and you can't install a system without them and AFAICT it is fully compliant > with https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript OK. > - [ ??? ] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as > described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. > > Can I have an example of how to test this, please? > > DH: you need a running PostgreSQL server somewhere, a DB user with the > permission to create databases and set the values in /etc/trytond.conf > appropriately, you really need to configure it manually > > - [ ??? ] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, > /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which > provides the file instead of the file itself. Please see File Dependencies > in the Guidelines for further information. > > DH: there are no file dependencies in the package Sorry, misread the SHOULD item. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review